Now Democrats Call To Delay Obamacare.

[UncleBuck]

read it again.."delay PENALTY"..

but didn't you hear ginwilly whine?

didn't you cry some crocodile tears for poor little ol' ginwilly?

i sure did.

 

[ginwilly]

read it again.."delay PENALTY"..

I'm hoping you realize the PENALTY and mandate are the same thing and misread beenthere's quote or something. Otherwise I don't understand what you are doing here. It's like you are saying nut uh, Dems don't want to postpone the mandate, they want to postpone the penalty, surely that's not what you are saying is it?

 

[ginwilly]

but didn't you hear ginwilly whine?

didn't you cry some crocodile tears for poor little ol' ginwilly?

i sure did.

You are an odd dude Buck.

Do you watch a football game and see a receiver do a TD dance and think he's suffering? I posted a link man, that's hardly whining. But I appreciate your heart felt sympathy.

 

[ChesusRice]

Worse case scenario is they extend the enrollment period for however long it takes to fix the website.
Republicans are scared to death of Obamacare. When it works out they will be exposed as liars. Polling is already showing even Republican voters believe the Republican party puts their Party above the countries interest

 

[ginwilly]

Worse case scenario is they extend the enrollment period for however long it takes to fix the website.
Republicans are scared to death of Obamacare. When it works out they will be exposed as liars. Polling is already showing even Republican voters believe the Republican party puts their Party above the countries interest

Oh most definitely the old guard GOP went against the country's interest and were only interested in keeping their positions.

Do you think the Dems were acting in the people's interest when what they are asking for now would have prevented a shutdown before it happened?

Serious question for ya. If the people voting, elect a republican in their area, would that republican be acting in the people's interest (who he represents) by trying to repeal O'care? I know you know how awesomely awesome O'care is, but you need to realize there are some people who think otherwise, they vote, have representation, and want things different from you. Not sure why you think those people don't deserve the same government you have.

But then, when you think everyone who is against O'care is simply a racist teabagger like you do, it's hard to get past your hatred and bigotry to realize those people have rights too.

Also, why is it fair of Him to give special consideration and delays to businesses, unions, and anyone connected, but not the individual person? Seems like something those dirty, racist, greedy republicans would do. Give businesses exemptions but not the people who work there. It's shocking really that dems approve of this. I thought you guys fought for the little man against this kind of shit, but it's your side doing it... so...

 

[Rob Roy]

That is the bitch about this. Because a black man put it into action Republicans dont want it. Even though it is essentially a Republican plant from 15 yrs ago. Watch bill mahr a little bit and take a break from fox news if you want a little bit of truth.

Is it possible some people wouldn't want this erm "free healthcare" if it weren't championed by a mulatto and that race has nothing to do with it?

 

[ginwilly]

Is it possible some people wouldn't want this erm "free healthcare" if it weren't championed by a mulatto and that race has nothing to do with it?

 

[ChesusRice]

Oh most definitely the old guard GOP went against the country's interest and were only interested in keeping their positions.

Do you think the Dems were acting in the people's interest when what they are asking for now would have prevented a shutdown before it happened?
What could of prevented the Shutdown? be specific.

Serious question for ya. If the people voting, elect a republican in their area, would that republican be acting in the people's interest (who he represents) by trying to repeal O'care? I know you know how awesomely awesome O'care is, but you need to realize there are some people who think otherwise, they vote, have representation, and want things different from you. Not sure why you think those people don't deserve the same government you have.
Yes in their area they are representing their constituents. And Nationally The President got elected 2x on the strength of support for his healthcare plan

But then, when you think everyone who is against O'care is simply a racist teabagger like you do, it's hard to get past your hatred and bigotry to realize those people have rights too.
No I only think that racists and bigots are racists and bigots. You are not a victim of white persecution. If you think you are seek out a Klan representative or Tea party chapter in your area if you havent already

Also, why is it fair of Him to give special consideration and delays to businesses, unions, and anyone connected, but not the individual person? Seems like something those dirty, racist, greedy republicans would do. Give businesses exemptions but not the people who work there. It's shocking really that dems approve of this. I thought you guys fought for the little man against this kind of shit, but it's your side doing it... so..
Why dont you state what THE exemption is What it applies to and when it ends?

The first part of Scalise’s statement refers to one-year waivers that the Department of Health and Human Services granted to 1,231 companies and other organizations regarding the law’s restrictions of annual benefit caps.
Yep, you read that correctly. He is referring to a one-year waiver regarding one, relatively small aspect of the law.
The waivers were granted to companies (such as McDonald’s or other fast food chains) and other organizations that provided inexpensive bare-bones health plans known as “mini-meds,” in what the administration called “a bridge” to 2014, when the law would be fully implemented. That’s because the law says that annual coverage limits can’t be lower than $750,000 in 2013 — and there are no annual dollar limits starting in 2014. So without those waivers, employees in those plans might have been left in the lurch until the law fully went into effect.
All told, the waivers cover a little under 4 million people, or 3 percent of population in employer-provided health plans. But Scalise is wrong to suggest these waivers were permanent — or went to “groups.” The waivers to this one part of the law expire in just a few months.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/16/did-obama-exempt-1200-groups-including-congress-from-obamacare/

 

[ginwilly]

So you are justifying the delays to businesses but not to the everyday working Joe. Wow. What the hell do dems stand for if not the everyman?

 

[ChesusRice]

So you are justifying the delays to businesses but not to the everyday working Joe. Wow. What the hell do dems stand for if not the everyman?

So you didnt read any of what i posted.

Back on the ignore list with you

You are either

Dishonest
or
Willfully Uniformed

 

[ginwilly]

So you didnt read any of what i posted.

Back on the ignore list with you

You are either

Dishonest
or
Willfully Uniformed

Yes, I read it. Your point for not granting temporary delays to individuals is because the delays to businesses are temporary?

Why are you against helping out average Joe? You know politically you will have to eventually to save face right? And when the individual mandate is delayed, dishonest uninformed people like you will THEN claim it's what's best. I wish you would do it now.

It's like watching Buck trying to explain how we should handle Libya. You don't have an opinion until someone gives you one.

 

[ChesusRice]

Yes, I read it. Your point for not granting temporary delays to individuals is because the delays to businesses are temporary?

Why are you against helping out average Joe? You know politically you will have to eventually to save face right? And when the individual mandate is delayed, dishonest uninformed people like you will THEN claim it's what's best. I wish you would do it now.

It's like watching Buck trying to explain how we should handle Libya. You don't have an opinion until someone gives you one.

Willfully ignorant
and dishonest

You really are a douchebag. Enjoy your miserable life

 

[ginwilly]

Willfully ignorant
and dishonest

You really are a douchebag. Enjoy your miserable life

Coming from a grown man who displays a burning cross like a badge, calls women cunts on an internet forum and has had more personal catastrophes that only the government could have allowed you to overcome, I don't know how to take this. I'm leaning toward I should be flattered.

I get by in life and will do my best to enjoy, thanks for the encouragement, you do the same brother.

 

[ChesusRice]

Coming from a grown man who displays a burning cross like a badge, calls women cunts on an internet forum and has had more personal catastrophes that only the government could have allowed you to overcome, I don't know how to take this. I'm leaning toward I should be flattered.

I get by in life and will do my best to enjoy, thanks for the encouragement, you do the same brother.

Wilfully ignorant
a douche
and a malcontent asshole. No wonder your family disowned you

I would go so far as to call you a whiny cunt

 

[nitro harley]

Coming from a grown man who displays a burning cross like a badge, calls women cunts on an internet forum and has had more personal catastrophes that only the government could have allowed you to overcome, I don't know how to take this. I'm leaning toward I should be flattered.

I get by in life and will do my best to enjoy, thanks for the encouragement, you do the same brother.

Buck an PornO cheezyO have there wives supporting them with there health care by the sounds of it..So what does that tell you about a man?.. And then they come on this forum acting like father knows best..To me it makes them sound like fucking idiots..

 

[schuylaar]

So you didnt read any of what i posted.

Back on the ignore list with you

You are either

Dishonest
or
Willfully Uniformed

[h=1]Is the Right-Wing Psyche Allergic to Reality? A New Study Shows Conservatives Ignore Facts More Than Liberals[/h]
More evidence that conservatives tilted their views of the facts to favor their moral convictions more than liberals did, on every single issue.

August 27, 2012 |



This story was originally published at Salon.

Last week, the country convulsed with outrage over Missouri Republican Rep. Todd Akin’s false suggestion that women who are raped have a special bodily defense mechanism against getting pregnant. Akin’s claim stood out due to its highly offensive nature, but it’s reminiscent of any number of other parallel cases in which conservative Christians have cited dubious “facts” to help rationalize their moral convictions. Take the twin assertions that having an abortion causes breast cancer or mental disorders, for instance. Or the denial of human evolution. Or false claims that same-sex parenting hurts kids. Or that you can choose whether to be gay, and undergo therapy to reverse that choice. The ludicrous assertion that women who are raped have a physiological defense mechanism against pregnancy is just part of a long litany of other falsehoods in the Christian right’s moral and emotional war against science.

In fact, even as Akin reaped a whirlwind of disdain and disgust, a new scientific paper has appeared with uncanny timing in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, underscoring what is actually happening when people contort facts to justify their deep seated beliefs or moral systems. Perhaps most strikingly, one punch line of the new research is that political conservatives, like Akin, appear to do this significantly more than political liberals.

In recent years, the field of moral psychology has been strongly influenced by a theory known as “moral intuitionism,” which has been championed by the University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt. Dealing a blow to the notion of humans as primarily rational actors, Haidt instead postulates that our views of what is right and wrong are rooted in gut emotions, which fire rapidly when we encounter certain moral situations or dilemmas—responding far more quickly than our rational thoughts. Thus, we evaluate facts, arguments, and new information in a way that is subconsciously guided, ormotivated, by our prior moral emotions. What this means– in Haidt’s famed formulation–is that when it comes to evaluating facts that are relevant to our deep seated morals or beliefs, we don’t act like scientists. Rather, we act like lawyers, contorting the evidence to support our moral argument.
But are we all equally lawyerly? The new paper, by psychologists Brittany Liu and Peter Ditto of the University of California-Irvine, suggests that may not actually be the case.
In their study, Liu and Ditto asked over 1,500 people about their moral and factual views on four highly divisive political issues. Two of them–the death penalty and the forceful interrogation of terrorists using techniques like water-boarding–are ones where liberals tend to think the act in question is morally unacceptableeven if it actually yields benefits (for instance, deterring crime, or providing intelligence that can help prevent further terrorist strikes). The other two–providing information about condoms in the context of sex education, and embryonic stem cell research–are ones where conservatives tend to think the act in question is unacceptable even if it yields benefits (helping to prevent unwanted pregnancies, leading to cures for devastating diseases).

In the experiment, the subjects were first asked about their absolute moral beliefs: For instance, is the death penalty wrongeven if it deters others from committing crimes? But they were also asked about various factual aspects of each topic: Does the death penalty deter crime? Do condoms work to prevent pregnancy? Does embryonic stem cell research hold medical promise? And so on.

If you believe some act is absolutely wrong, period, you shouldn’t actually care about its costs and benefits. Those should be irrelevant to your moral judgment. Yet in analyzing the data, Liu and Ditto found a strong correlation, across all of the issues, between believing something is morally wrong in all case–such as the death penalty–and also believing that it has low benefits (e.g., doesn’t deter crime) or high costs (lots of innocent people getting executed). In other words, liberals and conservatives alike shaded their assessment of the facts so as to align them with their moral convictions–establishing what Liu and Ditto call a “moral coherence” between their ethical and factual views. Neither side was innocent when it came to confusing “is” and “ought” (as moral philosophers might put it).



http://www.alternet.org/right-wing-psyche-allergic-reality-new-study-shows-conservatives-ignore-facts-more-liberals

 

[ChesusRice]

Buck an PornO cheezyO have there wives supporting them with there health care by the sounds of it..So what does that tell you about a man?.. And then they come on this forum acting like father knows best..To me it makes them sound like fucking idiots..

Yeah I'm dumb as shit.
My employer offers a healthcare plan also.
Difference is all the deductibles in my wifes plan are covered by her company.


So what do you suggest I do? Maybe pay more for less insurance?

And ginwilly is right I do call some women cunts on the internet

So why don't you stop being a stupid cunt?

 

[nitro harley]

So what do I suggest you do?...Well I would start with the kkk burning cross you are sporting...It makes you look like a racist idiot for starters...

 

[ChesusRice]

So what do I suggest you do?...Well I would start with the kkk burning cross you are sporting...It makes you look like a racist idiot for starters...

Only to a fucking idiot like you

Everyone else see it as a indictment against your tea party movement

I'm happy you are offended by it. Which is strange since I figured you would be Proud of your White pride movement

 

[ChesusRice]

For real its a Tea Party rally at the white house 2 weeks ago